From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA6027F75C; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 21:16:16 +0200 (CEST) Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of whitequark@whitequark.org) identity=pra; client-ip=176.58.103.125; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="whitequark@whitequark.org"; x-sender="whitequark@whitequark.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: domain of whitequark@whitequark.org designates 176.58.103.125 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=176.58.103.125; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="whitequark@whitequark.org"; x-sender="whitequark@whitequark.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1" Received-SPF: None (mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail.whitequark.org) identity=helo; client-ip=176.58.103.125; receiver=mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr; envelope-from="whitequark@whitequark.org"; x-sender="postmaster@mail.whitequark.org"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvB2AMOiEFSwOmd9/2dsb2JhbABfg2BYgiuueQEBAQEBAQaBPJdZh0sBgSh4hAQBAwIYIAI/EAQHGC4sKwYbiD4JvwsBF4V8g2aEXYEOB4RMAQSLNopDiGKTWoNmOC+CTwEBAQ X-IPAS-Result: AvB2AMOiEFSwOmd9/2dsb2JhbABfg2BYgiuueQEBAQEBAQaBPJdZh0sBgSh4hAQBAwIYIAI/EAQHGC4sKwYbiD4JvwsBF4V8g2aEXYEOB4RMAQSLNopDiGKTWoNmOC+CTwEBAQ X-Spam-Status: Yes X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,500,1406584800"; d="scan'208";a="94019902" Received: from fehu.whitequark.org (HELO mail.whitequark.org) ([176.58.103.125]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 10 Sep 2014 21:16:15 +0200 Received: by mail.whitequark.org (Postfix, from userid 33) id 0079B10D00F; Wed, 10 Sep 2014 19:16:13 +0000 (UTC) To: Yotam Barnoy X-PHP-Originating-Script: 1000:rcube.php MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 23:16:13 +0400 From: Peter Zotov Cc: Ocaml Mailing List , caml-list-request@inria.fr In-Reply-To: References: <5410522E.3050207@inria.fr> <1410359012.3003.34.camel@thinkpad> <54106B6D.4040607@gmail.com> Message-ID: X-Sender: whitequark@whitequark.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.0.1 Subject: Re: [Caml-list] One build system to rule them all? On 2014-09-10 22:59, Yotam Barnoy wrote: > ocp-build actually looks very interesting. The manual (which is here: > http://github.com/OCamlPro/ocp-build/blob/master/docs/user-manual/user-manual.pdf?raw=true > [2]) is incomplete, but contains a nice survey of the existing build > tools, and motivation for making ocp-build. Has anyone had experience > with ocp-build? Opam seems to be using it, but they also use a > makefile (why?) with a bunch of shell commands inside (which is > precisely the problem from my perspective). ocp-build is supposedly > compatible with Windows, too. Every single time I had to use ocp-build, it broke in an odd and hard to fix way. It was so bad that eventually I just ported the ocp-build-using projects (ocp-index and its dependencies) to OASIS. Most worryingly it has some strange requirement to ship bytecode, which ties it to a released OCaml version; no other buildsystem needs that. -- Peter Zotov